Meta

Why would Al Gore, who is notoriously guilty of a huge amount of personal energy consumption, be touting a “global solution” to a “global problem” unless he was firmly in favor of and promoting the NWO?

Why would the mainstream media be advancing the notion of a “global warming” problem if this promotion was not dictated by its corporate masters?

5 Responses

Listen to how the language has changed. Since the evidence does not support global warming they now call it climate change, so whether temperatures go up or go down they can use this as evidence we should be punished, taxed or both. In England I have heard there are fines if the weight in the recyclers is too low per week and fines if the trash exceeds certain weights per household. It is definitely global governance not global warming. The facts show that although CO2 has risen the temperature has not increased yearly along with the rise in the last 10 years. But their purpose hasn’t changed, just the name they are calling it- CLIMATE CHANGE.

Lets turn the tables and GRANT their case; Man is causing Global Warming.

Then the question becomes, now what?

I submit that the best solution is not a top down solution, but a bottom up solution. I submit that the best solution will come from the free market itself. Central to the Free Market is the use of the price system. Since we grant their case–that Mankind is causing Global warming through its use of fossil fuels, we can also grant their case that these fossil fuels, crude oil, are in declining supply, and “Peak Oil” has been reached. With less supply of oil to be had, the Price will go up. As the price goes up, other energy options become more attractive to the consumer. If we rely on the free market’s use of the price system to guide consumers to use a better energy source (better for the planet), that will be 1 million times better than a Top Down “solution” imposed by force. Already Tata Motors from India has an engine that runs on compressed air. As we rely on businesses responding to energy prices in the free market to come up with more and more alternate energy sources, we will be moving in the direction of “helping the planet” —that is without using the UN or NWO or any TOP DOWN government strategy. In the meantime, if OPEC countries and Venezuela and Africa and even Europe all want to simply stop production of oil, for the benefit of Mankind, then please go right ahead. Meanwhile, the USA will continue on its own course and use the Capitalist Free Market system to solve its own energy needs, thank you very much.

It is our reliance on the USA “continuing its own course” and our faith in big business to solve our energy problems that brought us to where we are. And that is, dependent on fossil fuels, and huge corporations to “do the right thing.” Face it, if big business is trusted to do the right thing, they will milk us, bleed us dry, and kill us off one by one.

Exactly. My question is, if man is the cause of “global warming” or “climate change,” then why not tax the ones most culpable, and that is big corporations? Oops, sorry, they will just move to another country where there are no environmental conservation limitations and foul their ecology. But wait, they are already doing that, aren’t they.

Allowing big business to do as it likes without adequate oversite is like letting a coyote live in the chicken coop. Not gonna be a lot of chickens left come morning!

Yes Barbara, I see your point. It is up to us to come up with solution. This is our only chance to to get away from their control, to control ourselves, to find solutions that don’t depend on the global governance schemes. We need to find ways to involve our communities in projects to off set rising energy costs that will put the money back in our own pockets. That is how they do it in the Netherlands. Neighborhoods form community networks that buy windmills, everyone has a share in the cost and a share in the profits. It takes it away from foreign investors and puts the money back into the neighborhood.